The Most Anti-Tech Organizations in AmericaVerizon dominates list, thinks PC World's 'Shizophrenic' ( old news - 08:41AM Monday Dec 03 2007) tags: competition · business · wireless · Op/EdPC World rattles off a top five list of the "Most Anti-Tech Organizations in America," affixing the RIAA and MPAA atop the list for eliminating innovation in their sector. The magazine isn't too kind to phone companies, putting them at number three for their fight against network neutrality, number five for their stranglehold on the wireless sector, and number four for their fight against even broadband deployment: The phone and cable companies have had little real incentive to improve the speeds, prices, and reach of their broadband services. Today most Americans, if they have any choice of broadband providers at all, can choose service only from a cable or a telephone company ISP. Meanwhile, the FCC and the courts have consistently ruled that the cable and telephone companies are under no legal obligation to share their broadband lines with would-be competitors. Some argue that federally collected monies and tax incentives helped pay for those lines in the first place, and that the current owners of those facilities have an obligation to share them. Only real competition, not the short-term interests of shareholders, can compel ISPs in the U.S. to boost broadband speeds and lower costs to world-class levels Verizon and AT&T actually catch a break in that the piece only highlights one group that's used to dispense disinformation dressed up as economic science (Progress and Freedom Foundation). In addition to lobbying, both companies actually use dozens of such groups (including fake consumer advocacy organizations) to help push policies that eliminate competition, accountability, innovation and consumer rights. Verizon makes a post to their policy blog suggesting PC World shouldn't include them in the list because they're deploying FiOS. However, select deployment of fiber (which we all love) doesn't wash clean the company's long track record of crushing competition, suing municipal Wi-Fi projects out of existence, nickel and diming consumers, using astroturf to distort public discourse and generally stomping around the industry school yard like a deep-pocketed bully. There's just no way they're going to make us forget about decades of anti-consumer activity just by dangling fiber in front of.... symmetrical 20Mbps you say? What were we talking about?
Related:- Google, You're a Wireless Tease
- So Much For The Talk of Open Wireless Networks
- Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
- Pennsylvania Plays Stimulus Keep Away
- Gimped Skype release, AT&T TOS Changes Annoy Advocates
- Journal: AT&T Should Ditch $30 Unlimited Data
- AT&T: High SMS Prices A 'Faulty Notion'
- Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
|
 
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden |  What Credibility?
-Tzale | |
|  | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| Re: What Credibility? I read that statement as deploying to all neighborhoods rather than just deploying to neighborhoods where demographics indicate the best potential subscriber pool. Apparently they believe Verizon has not been fairly allocating their investments.
There's nothing wrong with this. Verizon shareholders expect management to invest with the best possible return. However, if Verizon uses even a dime of the USF slush fund or leverages any tax incentives, they are feeding at the public trough and their interests are in conflict.
I have a fix for this...end the corporate welfare. If your blood boils over initiatives like national health care, look around. At best, that type of policy is only half the story. | |
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: What Credibility? Any and all welfare for any specific group should be eliminated. | |
| | | | 
FiL
Premium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD
| Re: What Credibility? I don't think that fair to say...just because welfare helps a majority of, say, black people in inner cities doesn't mean Appalachian and Midwest white folks don't get any of it either.
Its not a specific group being targeted, you mention this like as only a black single mother getting help is bad...lol, its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. | |
| | | | | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by FiL  :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world.
We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | 
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
| Re: What Credibility? said by pnh102 :said by FiL :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. Bullshit, tell your crock of shit to the people who are 1 paycheck away from the streets, poor is poor, dead is dead.
No matter where you are.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon | |
| | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by gaforces :Bullshit, tell your crock of shit to the people who are 1 paycheck away from the streets, poor is poor, dead is dead. No matter where you are. Tell that to people who have lived on their streets their entire lives.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
4 edits | Re: What Credibility? VExec1: Yah the reports say we will make more poor people if we dont deploy to some less dense areas.
Vexec2: Too bad, we have a responsibility to our shareholders, besides, those poor people here live like kings compared to some other countrys ...
Vexec1: Sounds good, screwem.
Most people living on the streets in the US dont last more than 5 years. They fall through the cracks, most wont go to homeless shelters, and they die or go to jail.
Exposure by hypothermia:
"Stages in humans
Normal body temperature in humans is 37°C (98.6°F). Hypothermia can be divided in three stages of severity.
In stage 1, body temperature drops by 1-2°C below normal temperature (1.8-3.6°F). Mild to strong shivering occurs. The victim is unable to perform complex tasks with the hands; the hands become numb. Blood vessels in the outer extremities constrict, lessening heat loss to the outside air. Breathing becomes quick and shallow. Goose bumps form, raising body hair on end in an attempt to create an insulating layer of air around the body (limited use in humans due to lack of sufficient hair, but useful in other species). Often, a person will experience a warm sensation, as if they have recovered, but they are in fact heading into Stage 2. Another test to see if the person is entering stage 2 is if they are unable to touch their thumb with their little finger; this is the first stage of muscles not working.
In stage 2, body temperature drops by 2-4°C (3.6-7.2°F). Shivering becomes more violent. Muscle mis-coordination becomes apparent. Movements are slow and labored, accompanied by a stumbling pace and mild confusion, although the victim may appear alert. Surface blood vessels contract further as the body focuses its remaining resources on keeping the vital organs warm. The victim becomes pale. Lips, ears, fingers and toes may become blue.
In stage 3, body temperature drops below approximately 32°C (90°F). Shivering usually stops. Difficulty speaking, sluggish thinking, and amnesia start to appear; inability to use hands and stumbling are also usually present. Cellular metabolic processes shut down. Below 30°C (86°F) the exposed skin becomes blue and puffy, muscle coordination very poor, walking nearly impossible, and the victim exhibits incoherent/irrational behavior including terminal burrowing or even a stupor. Pulse and respiration rates decrease significantly but fast heart rates (ventricular tachycardia, atrial fibrillation) can occur. Major organs fail. Clinical death occurs. Because of decreased cellular activity in stage 3 hypothermia, the body will actually take longer to undergo brain death."
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothermi···n_humans
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition | |
| | | | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: What Credibility? How did Verizon make anyone "poor?"
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
| Re: What Credibility? Some people are content with 15th place for world broadband deployment. Others of which I am included, see that our future depends on it, and see that a few big companys are content with the status quo where they can still keep making billions with little effort.
Looking to thier shareholder profit at the detriment to the whole country, and getting away with it by bribes through a corrupt lobbying system where only the people with money have a say.
All the while, other countrys who are interested in leading technology in the future, without thinking of selfish short term money grubbing, are way ahead of us in tech with the ability to jump ahead in leaps faster than we can.
Leaving the US as bottom of the world barrel.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon | |
| | | | | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by gaforces :Some people are content with 15th place for world broadband deployment. Others of which I am included, see that our future depends on it, and see that a few big companys are content with the status quo where they can still keep making billions with little effort. So what do you want Verizon to do?
The only way we can resolve this problem is to encourage more companies like Verizon to run fiber and to make other investments into infrastructure. You should be praising Verizon for making the risky investments needed to deliver better broadband.
If Verizon investors make billions off the deal, that only proves that they made the correct investment.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
4 edits | Re: What Credibility? Other companys that could afford to invest arent, because they have no competition/reason to. For around 8 years we've had DSL here, I figure that is enough profit made by SBC/ATT to have upgraded our area 2x+ over.
I'll praise Verizon when they offer FIOS in my area, oh but they cant, this is SBC/ATT territory.
They are definitly smarter than SBC/ATT by investing into thier network to compete better with cable, small isp, and cell providers. Even at 20/20 it still would put us behind the world standings.
Its risky not to invest in infrastructure, even if they can only make more profit (Urban), and less profit (rural areas) they should still have to serve areas in thier "territory" or give up the urban areas near where they wont deploy.
If you want your cake, you must eat more vegetables and meat like substance. UK translation, How can ye have any pudding if ye dont eat yer meat?
Having 1 company that is better than the rest of our lousy 15th place standing is better than nothing, so "atta boy" Verizon.
I can almost hear ye now.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| said by gaforces :Some people are content with 15th place for world broadband deployment. Others of which I am included, see that our future depends on it, and see that a few big companys are content with the status quo where they can still keep making billions with little effort. Looking to thier shareholder profit at the detriment to the whole country, and getting away with it by bribes through a corrupt lobbying system where only the people with money have a say. All the while, other countrys who are interested in leading technology in the future, without thinking of selfish short term money grubbing, are way ahead of us in tech with the ability to jump ahead in leaps faster than we can. Leaving the US as bottom of the world barrel. WTF do you want Verizon to do????? Verizon is a public company, they ARE going to want to turn a profit at the end of the quarter... What don't you get????? Verizon is not going to wire up the hood just so they can have their lines cut or their workers shot at.... And no one will want it or be able to afford it there anyway.... Someday, YES... But for now, it is expensive and Verizon is only going to deploy to places that they are guaranteed a good return.... And I've seen VZ deploying in lower income places here in NJ, so I think that the entire conspiracy theory is complete BS... I'd say they are avoiding deploying their heavily, but it's not avoided completely!
-Tzale
--
Hello Verizon FIOS 12.03.07!
457,000,000 miles of fiber optics placed and counting!
~THANK YOU MY ANONYMOUS FRIEND~ | |
| | | | | | | | | |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
1 edit | Re: What Credibility? Bump out the 100/100 (ipv6 compatible) quick as they can, so that others will have to re-think thier deployments seriously.
Get USF priority re-allocated to deployment in rural areas, so its not such a burden on this poor company. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
1 edit | Re: What Credibility? said by gaforces :Bump out the 100/100 (ipv6 compatible) quick as they can, so that others will have to re-think thier deployments seriously. Get USF priority re-allocated to deployment in rural areas, so its not such a burden on this poor company. I'd say 30/5, 20/5 and 20/20 is a pretty good start. Don't forget that without Verizon FiOS, there would be NO competition in the broadband world... Cable VS DSL was not really "competition." FIOS is FORCING cable companies to rethink their strategies. You just can't offer 100/100... That would require a massive restructuring of the backbones. Right now, Verizon is handling FiOS bandwidth quite well and they're expanding bandwidth occasionally... I'd say within 5 years or less we'll be at 100/100. There is really no "need" for 100/100 right now outside of warez... I am a HEAVY user and I only need 20/5 to get most of my work done, 20/20 is overkill for me.
-Tzale | |
| | | | | | |
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| said by gaforces :said by pnh102 :said by FiL :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. Bullshit, tell your crock of shit to the people who are 1 paycheck away from the streets, poor is poor, dead is dead. No matter where you are. The only difference is that the "poor" people here have thousands of "rich" people for each of themselves... Therefore, it isn't as "bad" as it would be if EVERYONE was "poor."
-Tzale | |
| | | | | | viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
 ·Qwest.net
| said by pnh102 :said by FiL :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. Maybe not in Mt Airy, but go to downtown DC, or Baltimore, or Philly and check out the homeless, and tell me they aren't poor. While I agree that poverty overseas can be much more extreme, those are generally in much more impoverished nations as a whole. For the richest country in the world to balk at helping their own is sad, very sad. | |
| | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by viperlmw :Maybe not in Mt Airy, but go to downtown DC, or Baltimore, or Philly and check out the homeless, and tell me they aren't poor. However, even those people have access to shelters, food banks, charities, and emergency rooms for healthcare. Poor people in third world countries don't get anything like that.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | | 
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: What Credibility? said by pnh102 :said by viperlmw :Maybe not in Mt Airy, but go to downtown DC, or Baltimore, or Philly and check out the homeless, and tell me they aren't poor. However, even those people have access to shelters, food banks, charities, and emergency rooms for healthcare. Poor people in third world countries don't get anything like that. But the initial discussion revolved around the idea of removing all welfare...
i.e. getting rid of shelters, food banks, free medical, etc.
Poor people in 3rd world countries do have far better access to subsistence living than those living in poverty in the United States. Remove those social supports, and you will see the poverty class dying off quicker than the subsistence poor in the third world.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher | |
| | | | | | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Are there no homeless shelters ?
Are there no government homes ?
In So-Cal, you don't even have to be legal status in this country to get free (or close to free) housing, food stamps, WIC, schools, medical, you name it.
It also never freezes, so, technically it isn't impossible to live outdoors, and there are still plenty of homeless shelters.
If there were in North Dakota or MN, then there would be issues.
What typically happens is that
a) The rich get richer by being able to find tax loopholes.
b) The poor get enough assistance to survive or join the bottom end of the working world so that they can spend (which is what the economy is based on).
c) Middle class is taxed to death by the rest of the economy.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: What Credibility? Actually the rich do most of the spending as well. Poor people are too poor to do much spending. | |
| | | | | | | | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: What Credibility? Somewhat true...
Rich do more spending, in general (yeah they buy a lot of stuff), however, much of it is purchased through corporate resources, or as a method of tax reduction where possible (i.e. tax advisor/CPA will help to funnel cash into a purchase into a tax deductable item).
The poor can't afford anything (which is why corporations are ALWAYS giving items to the poor - gotta get them into the 'system' of spending to make money, credit/debt, etc. ). Gov't healthcare, bicycling, walking, rabbit ears, shelters, soup kitchens do not generate money.
Middle class is already there.. spending on daycare, clothes, sports, vehicles, insurance, TV, cable, phone, blah blah blah..
Middle class is '2 paychecks from bankruptcy'. In So-Cal, there were ~70k homes that were lost to the banks as many purchased homes they couldn't afford.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: What Credibility? Rich do more spending, in general (yeah they buy a lot of stuff), however, much of it is purchased through I'm not sure where you get your numbers, or what you mean by much of "it"; but the fact is that the richest 20% account for more than 60% of consumer spending.
The poor and middle class already tapped their full discretionary income, and then some, long ago, and essentially make up the inflation portion of spending growth.
I'm not sure why you mention bankruptcies in So-Cal; which were just as much a function of fraud, excessive price appreciation, and re-fi consumption as anything else. | |
| | | | | | thevorpal
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA
| said by pnh102 :said by FiL :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. You must have really lived a charmed existance to be so ignorant that there are truly poor people in the US.
We aren't talking about poor in the sense that they cannot afford the next game system. We are talking about poor in the sense that they don't know if they can afford their next meal.
You don't see them, because you grew up sheltered and safe. A study into rural Appalachia will set you straight. | |
| | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by thevorpal :We aren't talking about poor in the sense that they cannot afford the next game system. We are talking about poor in the sense that they don't know if they can afford their next meal. Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation.
Where are all these people dying of starvation in the USA because they cannot afford their next meal? If there are so many, surely we'd be hearing about it.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | | 
FactChecker
@cox.net
thumbs down from:
cdigioia
| Re: What Credibility? said by pnh102 :Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation. Ignorance of the reasons why that is the case is clear on your part... Before you use that as a reason as to why the poor in America are so good off, perhaps you should understand why that is a case.
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all and you would know that if you had a clue why it is that way instead of just blithely using an argument posed by talk show radio blow hards who don't have a clue. | |
| | | | | | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: What Credibility? said by FactChecker :
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all ... Hello?
If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: What Credibility? said by pnh102 :said by FactChecker :
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all ... Hello? If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving. But there is a pretty high chance that you are malnourished, which will kill you just as readily as starvation.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher | |
| | | | | | | | | |
factchecker
@cox.net
| said by pnh102 :Hello? If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving. You have missed the point and further illustrated a lack of knowledge on the topic of why under-priviledged people have a higher incidence of obesity.
When you have a clue about the how and why of obesity among the poor, you can talk about it. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
cdigioia
Premium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub
·Korea Telecom
| Re: What Credibility? said by factchecker :
When you have a clue about the how and why of obesity among the poor, you can talk about it.
Since you apparently have a clue, why not enlighten us all? All you're saying is "Nu-uh you're wrong!!", albeit more eloquently. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
cdigioia
Premium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub
·Korea Telecom
| said by factchecker :said by pnh102 :Hello? If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving. You have missed the point and further illustrated a lack of knowledge on the topic of why under-priviledged people have a higher incidence of obesity. When you have a clue about the how and why of obesity among the poor, you can talk about it. Poorer education and/or less ability to delay gratification. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
factchecker
@cox.net
| Re: What Credibility? said by cdigioia :Poorer education and/or less ability to delay gratification. Not even close and a common stereotype and misconception...
It comes more from necessity than anything. Poorer people have to problems - they need to work more to make the same amount of money as others and their ability to purchase food is dictated by the amount of money they have.
In order to work more, expedience is required when getting food, eating, etc., meaning far less time to shop, cook, etc. So, food that is fact and cheap becomes the preferred choice.
What is fast and cheap - bingo, fast food.
Poorer people are far more likely to consume fast food than people with better incomes, etc. They are not eating significantly more than their peers who have better incomes, rather, the large amounts of fats and empty calories are what is getting to them.
That better for you ? | |
| | | | | | | | | |
cdigioia
Premium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub
·Korea Telecom
| Re: What Credibility? Not even close to better for me. If you like, you can read my later post where I address things in more detail, but as a synopsis.
Poor people work more?
I disagree, hourly workers tend to stay under 40 hours a week. Salaried jobs (which tend to be held by the better educated) have no overtime pay. I've seen this myself in my immediate family (hourly), and friends (both hourly and salaried). Not to mention it's intuitive.
Fast food is cheap
No it's not, read my later post about putting myself through college. Pasta is cheap, bananas are cheap, milk is cheap. a $6 meal at Burger King is not. From personal experience working at McDonalds in high school, the poorest people didn't go for the dollar menu as much as the meals. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
factchecker
@cox.net
| Re: What Credibility? Read my later post. It addresses your issues.
As for your assertion that poor people only work under 40 hours per week... Poorer people are more likely to hold multiple jobs, demonstrated fact.
As for you not being "convinced", that does not change the data. You sound like you certainly have seen enough poverty around you, like most Americans, but seeing it and looking into it and researching its causes, problems and issues is a different thing. | |
| | | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| said by FactChecker :said by pnh102 :Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation. Ignorance of the reasons why that is the case is clear on your part... Before you use that as a reason as to why the poor in America are so good off, perhaps you should understand why that is a case. The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all and you would know that if you had a clue why it is that way instead of just blithely using an argument posed by talk show radio blow hards who don't have a clue. This is way off topic but we're so far from talking about corporate welfare (which is what I was talking about), what the hell....
I'm not a doctor so will someone who is please chime in? Can a person who is obese, provided their intestinal tract is normal, starve to death? Granted, if they go without food they may have a lot of problems from chemical imbalances since burning fat isn't very healthy but can we call this starving?
Lack of jobs or lack of government programs is not why there are a lot of homeless. Through no fault of their own I believe they create their own situation because of mental issues. Their mental state keeps them just unstable enough to fall through the cracks. Some of these issues might be fixable with various mental health medication. Other issues, whether due to life-long developmental challenges or self-inflicted drug addiction damage, cannot and will never be solved. The best we can do is institutionalize them. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
See 18 replies to this post | |
| | | | | | | bored_in_nh
join:2003-01-04
Stamping Ground, KY
·RoadRunner Cable
| Years ago, we were that poor. My wife and I worked shoveling out horse stalls. With no advanced education, our employment opportunities were limited. We had 2 small children, which we had to pay daycare for. I remember lots of meals of powdered eggs, gov't cheese, rice, things like that. We never had enough money to buy lunch, and often we'd feed the kids and go to bed hungry ourselves.
The poor exist in this country. You may not want to admit it, but they do. I saw on the news today a report of a couple and their grandmother starving twin boys. Accompanying that piece was a report of hunger in the U.S. This was on Fox News. They said that 16% of American children don't get enough to eat. You say "If there are so many, surely we'd be hearing about it." Well today, anyone watching Fox News heard about it.
--
In 2000, CEO pay was statistically 300:1 to minimum wage. In 2005, it's 431:1. If minimum wage matched growth rate with CEO pay from 1990 to 2005, it would now be $19.00/hr.
Is Ann Coulter a transexual? What's with that adams apple? | |
| | | | | | | | | FAQFixer
Premium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA | Re: What Credibility? Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
Rogue Wolf
Is Kind Of A Big Deal In Yemen
join:2003-08-12
Troy, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: What Credibility? said by FAQFixer :Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. Because nobody has ever lost a job, had a life-changing accident, etc. etc. after having children, right?
--
I have learned to ignore such naysayers, when... quelling... them... hm?... was out of the question. | |
| | | | | | | | | | FAQFixer
Premium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
| Re: What Credibility? said by Rogue Wolf :said by FAQFixer :Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. Because nobody has ever lost a job, had a life-changing accident, etc. etc. after having children, right? No, he specifically said, "With no advanced education, our employment opportunities were limited." He did not lose his job or have an accident...he and his wife did not seek an education or skills to get a decent job yet they choose to have kids. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: What Credibility? Or they didn't "choose" to have kids. Many kids come to be, without an educated choice. | |
| | | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| But how did you get that poor? Why did you increase your burden by having children if you were that poor? Did you lose your job(s) as a result of a business closing or relocating? Where is your family? Mother? Father? Sister? Brother?
If anyone in my extended family were in need, my door would be open. Food, clothes, shelter -- anything they need for as long as they need it. I'm by no means rich but I spend (waste) a lot of "disposable" income and that could be diverted to help family in need.
The difference is I choose to help rather than have socialists take it from me because I happen to be, as they put it, a winner in life's lottery. And I'm not just talking about social welfare but corporate welfare. It's ridiculous that I pay fees on my phone service to fund wires running in Timbuktu. Funding broadband deployment in this same manner is just a different shade of gray.
If we think it's such a good policy, why don't the people in these areas pass a property tax or sales tax and give it to mega-corporation X to bring service to their area? I'll tell you why this isn't done. Lots of small piles of money disperses power. If a central government body can collect billions, they have a lot of control. With control comes power -- what every human from the bottom-feeder cops (not all but too many) who revel in beating the shit out of someone because of the power trip to high-profile politicians who treat us like they own us.
Regarding your signature, it disappoints me when people point out CEO pay without also considering professional athletes and entertainers. It's like crying about social welfare without considering corporate welfare.
I don't disagree that CEO pay is ridiculous, especially when a lot of them are paid millions to leave after they make the company worse. However, entertainers, pro athletes and just about any celebrity all have exorbitant salaries with astronomical growth well beyond that which they deserve. It's not just CEOs making a money grab. | |
| | | | | | | | thevorpal
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA
| Are you familiar with what these people have to eat? Subsidized food from the government is often all they have. Our government takes care of them, and that is the only reason they aren't starving to death.
You can quickly become obese from eating the food available to the truly destitute in America. It is well known that the food these people receive from support groups is often little more than pure carbohydrates with little to no nutritional value.
It is a sad state of affairs that they are provided plenty of 'food' but are still actually starving. | |
| | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| I can't be sure (I didn't read all the replies) but I don't think anyone played the race card. The fact that people seem to associate certain races with welfare deserves its own topic.
To be clear, I'm not focusing on "social welfare". I'm asking for folks to open their eyes and realize how much money this government takes from us and gives to rich companies and, indirectly, rich people. I believe we generally do this with the best intentions but the abuse is sickening. And...at the end of the day these same welfare addicts rape us again with ridiculous prices, litigation if they cannot put a green refrigerator in your front yard and tear out your hedgerow and crappy, half-baked products. Somewhere there should be a REFUND button. | |
| | | | | | 
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs:
·Comcast
| said by pnh102 :said by FiL :its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. Wow! what a heartless thing to say... Come to New Mexico if you want to get a real picture of how poor people in the U.S. live. | |
| | | | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | This isn't a third world Country.
Well... it isn't..... Yet. | |
| | | bored_in_nh
join:2003-01-04
Stamping Ground, KY | I think you mentioned three key letters ... USF
They are more than in conflict, as you state it, they are as PC World states, stifling broadband deployment. The USF funds are to be used not just in areas where the biggest ROI will fire off. | |
| |
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
1 edit | said by Tzale :PC World has lost even more credibility as soon as I saw they included Verizon for their "fight against even broadband deployment." GET REAL! -Tzale I thought the article was suprisingly pro-consumer/tech for PCWORLD.
The author was correct to point out Verizons reluctance to deploy even broadband deployment.
Collecting USF and not deploying fairly is a definitly a conflict of interest to the public who pays the USF.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon | |
| | jdracer47
join:2005-10-16
Auburn, PA
| So you live in Jersey and are expecting Fios? Try living in many of Verizon's territories that do not even have DSL deployed and will never see Fios. It took PA Legislation to FORCE Verizon to deploy DSL to my community (Act 183). If not for the legislation it would have been a long time until any service at all was deployed. I get a little tired of Verizon fan-boys defending the company due to FTTH. There were many areas completely ignored during DSL deployment that continue to be ignored while Fios is being deployed to areas that had 4-5 other ISP choices already. | |
| | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Re: What Credibility? said by jdracer47 :So you live in Jersey and are expecting Fios? Try living in many of Verizon's territories that do not even have DSL deployed and will never see Fios. It took PA Legislation to FORCE Verizon to deploy DSL to my community (Act 183). If not for the legislation it would have been a long time until any service at all was deployed. I get a little tired of Verizon fan-boys defending the company due to FTTH. There were many areas completely ignored during DSL deployment that continue to be ignored while Fios is being deployed to areas that had 4-5 other ISP choices already. WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For every FOIS-enabled area that like Verizon, because they gave them another choice fro a TV provider, there are many, many areas (like mine) where Verizon is on the most-hated list: areas where Verizon has told the local franchise regulators that they'll never get FIOS, and where Verizon has not even deployed DSL, and probably never will. | |
| | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by Tzale :PC World has lost even more credibility as soon as I saw they included Verizon for their "fight against even broadband deployment." GET REAL! -Tzale Regardless of what your opinion of the "credibility" factor of PC World is, how can you even dispute that the **AA's are anti-technology? Have you not been paying attention to their revenue generation by litigation business model? The entire crux of that effort is to quash P2P technology. You don't need to read in a magazine to realize that sort of behavior, is, in and of itself, is anti-technology. | |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Verizon? | |
| |
JasonD
@comcast.net
| Re: Verizon? Hey these companies are big enough to try and have it both ways. It's good business practice and almost malpractice if they don't. Even self-proclaimed "green" Toyota is fronting opposition to cafe regulations.
While Verizon may know FIOS is the future, they want to push the broadband environment as far in their favor as possible. Nothing wrong with that. | |
| | 
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| said by pnh102 :Hello? FIOS anyone? I agree with everyone on that list and for the reasons stated.
Fios isnt curing cancer people. Its being rolled out by the same company that still makes everyones brow furrow and doesnt erase what a crap and broken corporation they are.
That is unless they rolled through your backyard with FIOS recently.
--
CableTechs.org/"Horrible People with Integrity" | |
| | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Verizon? said by CableTool :That is unless they rolled through your backyard with FIOS recently. They did not.
However, it doesn't change the fact that at least in the USA, fiber optics to the home is a novel and useful technological advance. PC World's labeling of Verizon as "anti-tech" even in light of this rollout is silly.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: Verizon? PCW madea list of companies they hate is all. | |
| satellite68
join:2007-04-11
Louisville, KY
| Rock you like a hurricane... quote:
Meanwhile, the FCC and the courts have consistently ruled that the cable and telephone companies are under no legal obligation to share their broadband lines with would-be competitors
While I agree with this in principle, and lived it in dot com reality while working for a CLEC, I can see both sides of the coin here. I do belive the landscape would be quite different had the ball rolled the other way, with competitor's paying hefty charges for their "shared" access to a more public network.
I'm just still sitting here wondering what was wrong with a little bit of competition. Guess it's not the American way anymore. If you can't compete, litigate. | |
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Rock you like a hurricane... quote:
Meanwhile, the FCC and the courts have consistently ruled that the cable and telephone companies are under no legal obligation to share their broadband lines with would-be competitors
Some might say that this makes the FCC the most anti-tech organization in America. 
Competition is great. Unfortunately, it seems that most potential competitors don't want to invest in their infrastructure to actually compete. | |
| | | 
GorbGuy
join:2003-09-23
Middleville, MI
clubs:
| Re: Rock you like a hurricane... said by openbox9 :Some might say that this makes the FCC the most anti-tech organization in America. That's exactly what I was thinking.
--
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? | |
| garmst
join:2000-09-17
New York, NY
·Speakeasy
| Yes, PC World is goofy Yes FIOS overall is the leading edge of Tech deployment. Their possible "opening" to non-VZ devices on wireless also is another pro-Tech move if it pans out. VZ also does not seem to come up on the list of ISP's blocking or excessively throttling traffic (VZ wireless excluded).
Corporations have free speech rights as well as citizens and they do and should lobby to advance their cause, this is the American way. "special interests" should do so as well. I am a "special interest" as an NRA type (I know this will kick up some dust!  )
VZ should have been smart enough to figure that Muni Wifi will die all by itself as unsustainable. Free never works or at least works adequately.
Now, ATT and QWEST is another matter!!! | |
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: Yes, PC World is goofy said by garmst :Corporations have free speech rights as well as citizens and they do and should lobby to advance their cause, this is the American way. Just keep in mind that money brings greed and greed brings corruption. There is not a single person immune to this and it is played out in our government every day. Even to our government, money is more important than it's people. | |
| 
needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through
join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ
| Tax Incentive Statement is Incorrect. "Meanwhile, the FCC and the courts have consistently ruled that the cable and telephone companies are under no legal obligation to share their broadband lines with would-be competitors. Some argue that federally collected monies and tax incentives helped pay for those lines in the first place, and that the current owners of those facilities have an obligation to share them."
This part is only 1/2 true. Cable companies did not get subsidized by tax payers to build their infrastructure. Their capital was raised through investors that put up great risk "back in the day". The fact that they mostly do not have a cable competitor in direct competition is not because of exclusive franchises with cities. Those don't exist as far as I know. Another cableco can come in and compete if it makes sense. The economic reality that it is too costly to overbuild and then share the market. So, now they should be forced to let another entity make a profit on their investment? To force a company to share its lines that IT and its investors built at their risk is tantamount to socialism IMHO. A slippery slope indeed. What's next? A Toyota dealer forced to share its lot because Ford can't compete because they have a crappy location? I know that is not apples to apples.
--
Great success! High five! | |
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| Re: Tax Incentive Statement is Incorrect. I agree with what you are saying regarding opening privately funded cable networks. However, I disagree with you on cost being the only issue preventing competition. We've seen both cable and telco incumbents fight tooth and nail to prevent municipal plans. Granted, it's one thing to compete with another corporation and quite a different thing to compete with the government. I do understand the incumbent's position. However, if they are not serving or they are underserving a market because they don't see enough profit, why fight municipal projects? | |
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | You are only 1/2 right. They were granted monopolies in many places. Whether we give them $1 billion to build out, or we make it so they can collect it through exclusiveness and noncompetitive pricing, it is still welfare and subsidization. | |
| 
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
|  Spot On
1st, hiring former members on a Congress members staff to lobby against Net Neutrality? Yep, Verizon is guilty of it.
2nd, penetration data. They are correct here. Although I think Verizon is doing a damn good job of rolling FiOS out, they still haven't deployed DSL to their entire customer base and it's been what, 10 years? It's been so long that they've given up on it, are trying to drop entire states (Fairpoint deal), and are replacing their network with fiber.
While FiOS is a shining example of the greatest consumer internet access technology out there, they aren't rolling it out to show how technology savvy they are. They are rolling it out because they never really wanted to share their lines in the first place - the Telcom Act of 1996 only requires them to share their copper plant - they want to offer TV as a new revenue stream, and since they don't have to share the lines, they lock you in and make it all but impossible to get your copper back to switch to a CLEC for DSL or POTS.
All of that is extremely Anti-Tech, but very Pro-Business!
--
Pretty Fly for a White Guy™ | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| Verizon issue Everyone has an issue with seeing Verizon on there becasue everyone on this site loves their fast internet.
Verizons roll out of Fios, that most of the country will never see, does not negate everything else going on.
Fiber is great.. cable has had it forever. But it isnt changing technology, it isnt changing the face of technology and it doesnt negate the fact that a lot of Verizons policies and lobbyists are actually HURTING forward progress across the board on many other fronts.
there is a big picture here people.. even if it casts everyones broadband savior in a bad light...
You dont make 3 out of 5 bullet points on a top five most anti tech companies by being the best tech company...
--
CableTechs.org/"Horrible People with Integrity" | |
|
gvalinoti
@verizon.net
| nope, no tech here!! fiber to the home ...check
100gig path ...check
symmetrical high speed....check
GPON....check
WDM-PON...check
FONE...check...
largest internet backbone...check
can someone spot the tech, i sure as hell cant...maybe if verizon deployed some traffic shaping technology then maybe that would get them recongnized as a tech company...  | |
| 
deadi
Premium
join:2001-08-26
Perry, OH
| competition? I really cant see how anyone can compete with the big telco/cable companys. Basically you would have to roll out your own network, especially if you cannot use existing lines. In our area a small ISP that I have run across offers DSL, but at an inflated rate because they have to pay what I would pay to get Broadband in the first place from the same telco. It seems small ISPs, as they come and go cannot compete.
I have not heard of a cable company that will share lines, has anyone else?
--
We learn through the exchange of information, tell me more...... | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
| Force them to share? Stating that that the providers should "share" because the government puts money up is ridiculous. Sure, they use our tax dollars for spending there but lets get real. At least with Verizon's FiOS initiative Verizon and it's investors not the government are paying for deployment. If you want to say the government has helped I can't deny that. But that amount is not as much as you'd think and to say it means Verizon should have to share all out is just dumb.
If the companies are force to share then the companies that leach that sharing should be forced to rent it.
--
»www.fairtax.org | |
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: Force them to share? You do realize that every penny ever earned by one of these companies is a direct result of initial government subsidies and government granted monopolies right?
They can rebuild the network hundreds of times with "their" money, but that money will always be a result of what WE gave them to begin with and what WE continue to give them now in other subsidies and corporate "friendly" policy. | |
| | |
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
1 edit | Re: Force them to share? So what, that still doesn't mean "we" own it. It means our tax dollars had a hand in helping build it. Which BTW, what makes you think that because our tax dollars paid for anything means we get to control it? The government doesn't work that way.
--
»www.fairtax.org | |
| 
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| RIAA and MPAA Seems to me that both these organizations have gone very high tech in the lengths they have gone to thwart piracy.
To say they are Anti-Tech is just silly! They set up fake web sites to push malware software written to track users, falsely seeded torrents, etc. So yes, they are very tech oriented... when it suits them.
Now, to say the recording and movie industry is anti tech.. there you may have something.
| |
| | 
Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
·Windstream
| Re: RIAA and MPAA said by Neyland :Seems to me that both these organizations have gone very high tech in the lengths they have gone to thwart piracy. To say they are Anti-Tech is just silly! They set up fake web sites to push malware software written to track users, falsely seeded torrents, etc. So yes, they are very tech oriented... when it suits them. Now, to say the recording and movie industry is anti tech.. there you may have something. This proves what many of those on the inside of the music industry have been trying to tell the public. The RIAA and MPAA are tring to protect their profits, NOT THE MUSICIANS.
With the record labes and RIAA etc getting 80% of the profit and the artists makeing maybe a dollar per CD, who is at risk of loosing?
After all I have several friends that had fliped the finger at the music industry. Put up their own sites, selling music direct to the public. They make at least 10 times selling their music direct.
Then people say but how are they found? Well if you also don't know, the music industry for years has been telling us what is cool and what is hip. Look at the FM radio dial. 20 stations in a town and 3 formats. Same crap over and over. There is a lot more to music than rock and country, but most of it isn't anywhere to be heard. Or out of print music? How do you hear it or buy it?
The RIAA and the Record Companies turned the music industry to crap long before even cassette tapes were invented. Do some research and many of the black entertainers were never paid a dime with their relatives still suing for profits from 40 years ago.
The best thing to do is just stop buying music from RIAA labels. They feel the money sue me sue you game, well consumers can play don't buy their music game.
But please don't boycott independent musicians, as supporting them and boycotting RIAA will do more to straighten the injustice that has nothing to do with MP3.
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/384 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with OpenWRT WR0.9 | 3 downstream switches feeding 6 total clients (no wireless) | Including the Data port on the side of my pork belly | | |
| | | | UncleDirtNap
join:2006-08-26
Pittsburgh, PA | There's a reason I haven't read PC World in years... ... grinding their own personal axe by incuding Verizon on their list is one example.
Verizon anti-tech - *pffth* my 20/20 FIOS data line and TV that stomps the snot out of Comcrap says otherwise. | |
| | thevorpal
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA
| Re: There's a reason I haven't read PC World in years... said by UncleDirtNap :... grinding their own personal axe by incuding Verizon on their list is one example. Verizon anti-tech - *pffth* my 20/20 FIOS data line and TV that stomps the snot out of Comcrap says otherwise. And what would you say to the policies they tried to implement on cell phones? Phones had capabilities disabled by Verizon that could be 'enabled' for a fee. Hiding or disabling the capabilities of smart phones or pocket PCs to the preference of crippled verizon alternatives?
Simply because they offer a service that you enjoy doesn't discount the fact that they have been the leader in squashing real technological innovation. | |
| | | kcir
join:2005-07-30
Butner, NC | Re: There's a reason I haven't read PC World in years... I was going to say amazing, but then just realized how typical it is for one to just look and their own beneficial circumstances and say the heck with how a company, government, etc is doing as a whole. | |
| | | UncleDirtNap
join:2006-08-26
Pittsburgh, PA
·Verizon FIOS
| "Simply because they offer a service that you enjoy doesn't discount the fact that they have been the leader in squashing real technological innovation."
Or worded in a more straight forward way; any company that doesn't operate as you think they should is no good.
Sorry, I don't see anything anti-tech in what you describe. So my cell phone doesn't have some useless widget you think it should *boo-hoo*
What I see is a company investing billions to push broadband technology and cable TV competition and finally putting the well deserved screws to Comcast, Cox, Time Warner and other proponents of last century technology when critics said it would never happen. | |
| Edward1978
join:2007-07-23
De Soto, IL
| It is almost 2008, we need more coverage!! Vorizen is just fine with me, I had to move almost a year ago to get DSL. Where I use to live AT&T was the phone company & they are to cheap to upgrade. So unless you are in or by a city chances are no DSL for you. It is almost 2008, no one should not have broadband as a option. | |
|
Offbase
@verizon.net
| offbase.. This is a bit offbase when taking about Verizon. Yes, while it's true for a while, Verizon has had a corporate culture of anti-technology improvements (well, they ARE a greedy telco, right?) in favor of massive profits. This is slowly changing, and it was the mantra of corporate culture buried deep in the corporation (much of which used to be separate companies). Going back, we're talking about former Ma-Bell entities--primarily GTE and Bell Atlantic (yes the New England region which they want to give up for adoption like a red-headed devilish stepchild). AT&T is another whole ball of wax.. they were the head of the snake not too many decades ago (MA-BELL). Since the breakup (1984) we've seen AT&T try and fail in many areas of technology.. such as providing local & long distance service to residential customers. Only recently has AT&T been allowed back in from the dog house by acquiring companies to get back into the last-mile residential communications. AT&T's plans for developing U-Verse triple play services still hearkens back the the mistakes Verizon's jewel Bell Atlantic made from 1996-2003 (they just don't realize it YET). Verizon should be the first company off this list BECAUSE much of the northeast has gotten a revised deployment schedule of FTTP, and you have to give credit where credit is due. That being said.. it doesn't matter to those who are STILL in 2007 stuck with a crappy cable company OR dialup (parts of Verizon footprint STILL CAN'T GET DSL EVEN NOW!!!, ugh!) Keep in mind, companies upgraded necessary infrastructure to save money and make bigger profits, it's just that the last mile services were NEVER seriously deployed for the most part until 2003)
I don't trust much of the common media to tell the truth now anyway. It's time the poor saps started doing some critical thinking of their own... | |
| FAQFixer
Premium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
| The other side I get a kick out of Kommie Karl's statement that,
"Verizon and AT&T actually catch a break in that the piece only highlights one group that's used to dispense disinformation dressed up as economic science (Progress and Freedom Foundation)."
I have often thought his news reporting,
"highlights one group that's used to dispense disinformation dressed up as economic science (dslreports.com)."
| |
| | 
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
3 edits | Re: The other side Didn't you read the BBR AUP which clearly says "You will be moderated if you post contradictory statements or negative comments on the editorial FACTS!!"... or was that AT&T's AUP?
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik | |
| | Airwolf7
Premium
join:2004-12-12
Franklin, KY
·AT&T Southeast
| FAQFixer this place is slowly turning into The Register »www.theregister.co.uk/ and a forum for crybabies who want something for nothing or want you to do everything for them with out spending a minute of their own time to take advantage of the FAQs and other info to help themselves to solve their own problem.
Maybe in the future Broadband Reports will start offering "crying towels" for five toolpoints. | |
|
anyone
@cox.net
| Progress? What's missing in this piece is that the economy has already been severally hurt by anti-tech policies. It doesn't mention that cell phones and wifi in asian countries have out-paced the U.S.
The idea of choosing between phones intentionally disabled in varying ways for varying different reasons put me off from replacing my cell phone for over 4 years. I still can't use the bluetooth with my computer - by design.
Meanwhile congress (and most state governors) are claiming that more skilled IT workers are needed and are pushing HARD to bring foreign workers. They claim the economy is stalled because there aren't enough IT workers.
What work? If I were going to start the next major corporation, it would NOT be in the U.S. and that has nothing to do with taxes.
Large companies pounce on any start-up that takes off too quickly, has too good of an idea, that introduces competition they weren't prepared for (RIAA, MPAA, Sony) including frivolous patent and trademark suits that would bankrupt a small company. I doubt if the pc could have been 'invented' against IBM with these laws now.
Pharma got their way patenting biologicals so that now instead of 2,000 researchers trying to cure a virus, there's maybe 5 that can afford the patents involved. Progress? | |
| NetKrazy
join:2007-11-29
Littleton, CO
| Anyone find this odd? That everyone jumped onto the MSO and provider front with people making points from both sides but it seems nobody jumped in to Condemn/Condone the listing of the MPAA/RIAA?
For some reason this just struck me as amusing why I have no idea. Although in posting this I feel like I should be standing in a stadium when everyone suddenly stops talking looks over and says in one loud voice in unison "Because we already know they suck". | |
| | | |
|
|
